Crestwood Manor - 104
1130 Monaco Court, Stockton, CA 95207 · San Joaquin County · 190 certified beds · avg 175 residents/day · certified since Mar 1, 1981
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 3/5
The health inspection star above is graded on a curve within each state — a set share of each state's facilities gets each star level — so a facility can have few citations and still rate 2–3 stars if others in its state did even better. The overall rating combines that inspection score with staffing and self-reported quality measures.
All citations in the current public record (34)
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint |
| Apr 13, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · from a complaint |
| Jan 7, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint |
| Sep 18, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · from a complaint |
| Sep 18, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility allowed residents to lose the ability to do daily activities — like bathing, dressing, and eating — when there was no medical reason for the decline. Good care helps residents keep the abilities they have. · from a complaint |
| Apr 25, 2025 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. |
| Apr 25, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care. |
| Apr 25, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. |
| Apr 25, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives. |
| Apr 25, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. |
| Apr 25, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. |
| Apr 25, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. |
| Apr 25, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. |
| Apr 25, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason. |
| Apr 25, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time. |
| Apr 25, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. |
| Aug 20, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not let a resident return after a hospital stay or approved leave that lasted longer than the facility's bed-hold policy allowed. Residents generally have the right to come back to the next available bed. · from a complaint |
| May 23, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide or arrange dental services for its residents. Nursing homes are responsible for making sure residents can get dental care. |
| May 23, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. |
| May 23, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not make reasonable adjustments to fit each resident's individual needs and preferences — things like call buttons within reach, preferred wake-up times, or accessible room setups. |
| May 23, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. |
| May 23, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. |
| May 23, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility allowed residents to lose the ability to do daily activities — like bathing, dressing, and eating — when there was no medical reason for the decline. Good care helps residents keep the abilities they have. |
| May 23, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. |
| May 14, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint |
| May 5, 2023 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. |
| May 5, 2023 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. |
| May 5, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. |
| May 5, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time. |
| May 5, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. |
| May 5, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. |
| May 5, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. |
| May 5, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason. |
| May 5, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (7 → 11).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 9 | 0 | F |
| 2024 | 9 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 13 | 0 | F |
| 2026 | 3 | 0 | D |
Counts reflect the current CMS public record (~3 inspection cycles plus complaint investigations); years with no surveys show no row. Inspection frequency varies, so compare severity as well as counts.
Fines and enforcement (last 3 years)
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
| Measure | This facility | California avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 9.05 | 4.31 | 3.95 | top 1% in California; top 1% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.71 | 0.61 | 0.69 | top 23% in California; top 35% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 8.39 | 3.90 | 3.50 | top 1% in California; top 1% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.33 | 0.51 | 0.48 | bottom 40% in California; bottom 38% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 9.8 | 36.7 | 45.8 | top 1% in California; top 1% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 0.0 | 38.1 | 42.9 | top 1% in California; top 1% in the U.S. |
Hours are per resident per day, case-mix adjusted by CMS so facilities caring for sicker residents can be compared fairly (same basis as the CMS staffing star). "Top X%" means better than most facilities: more staffing hours, or lower turnover. Raw (unadjusted) reported hours: total 6.26, RN 0.49, weekend 5.80. Staffing rating: 5/5.
Self-reported quality measures
Note: these ratings are based on data the facility reports about itself to CMS. They are not independently verified by inspectors, and can look better than inspection findings. Give more weight to the inspection results above.
Quality measures rating: 1/5 · long-stay residents: 1/5 · short-stay residents: —/5
Who owns this facility
For profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership Data Not Available |
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
- "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
- "How do you help residents maintain their daily living skills, and how do you measure whether it's working?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "How do you record and honor each resident's treatment wishes and advance directives, and how do staff know about them?"
- "How do you monitor residents' weight and eating, and what happens when someone starts losing weight?"
- "How do you track each resident's food allergies and preferences, and what happens if they don't like what's served?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"
Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brookside Care Center | 0.1 mi | Stockton, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Oak Grove Post Acute | 1.1 mi | Stockton, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Fulton Gardens Post Acute, LLC | 1.6 mi | Stockton, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Delta Oaks Post Acute | 1.7 mi | Stockton, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Noble Care Center | 1.8 mi | Stockton, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Good Samaritan Rehab and Care Center | 1.9 mi | Stockton, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Hampton Post Acute | 1.9 mi | Stockton, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Riverwood Health Care | 2.0 mi | Stockton, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Lincoln Square Post Acute Care | 2.1 mi | Stockton, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Clearwater Healthcare Center | 3.0 mi | Stockton, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Creekside Center | 3.1 mi | Stockton, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Crystal Creek Post-Acute | 3.6 mi | Stockton, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 05A340.